Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council asking the complainant to remove stones he had placed on the verge outside his home. It is unlikely we would find evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr X, complaints the Council is treating him differently to his neighbours. He says it has demanded he removes stones from the verge outside his home. Yet stones outside his neighbour’s properties can remain.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered:
• what Mr X said in his complaint.
• his complaints to the Council and is responses
• Mr X’s comment on the draft version of this decision

Back to top

What I found

5. Section 143 of The Highways Act 1980 (as amended) gives the Council powers to serve a notice requiring the removal of a structure from the highway. It also allows the Council to remove the structure and ‘recover expenses reasonably incurred’ from ‘the person having control or possession of the structure’.

Mr X says he put up fencing on his boundary. He says the Council told him to remove the fence, but he could have stones on the boundary instead.

6. The Council says it them received complaints about stones, metal spikes and wire on the verge outside Mr X’s home. It sent an officer to inspect the site. Following the site visit the Council asked Mr X to remove the items, including the stones.
7. Mr X complained to the Council that it was treating him differently because neighbouring properties had stones on the verge.
8. The Council says the stones are an obstruction on a very narrow lane. It explained it takes a practical approach when it receives such complaints. It also confirmed it is investigating the arrangements for maintaining the verge outside Mr X’s neighbour’s home.

Assessment

9. The Council as the highway authority is responsible for asserting and protecting the rights of public highway users. It has powers under the Highways Act 1980 to direct householders to remove plants or other items from the highway, including verges. Even if the householder owns the subsoil of a highway verge the authority can prevent or remove items being placed on it.
10. I understand Mr X believes the Council is treating him unfairly and being inconsistent because it is allowing stones outside neighbouring properties to remain.
11. However, it is for the Council to consider whether items placed on the verge are causing an obstruction. In this case, the Council considers the stones placed on the verge outside Mr X’s home are an obstruction. It is entitled to require him to remove them. It has also advised it is investigating the arrangements for maintaining the verge outside his neighbour’s property.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I will not investigate this complaint. In considering the above, it is unlikely we will find fault in the Council requiring Mr X to remove the stones from the grass verge outside his home. Nor is it likely that further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman